http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Colbert_conf...e_Ron_0614.html


Colbert: "You voted against the Patriot Act, you voted again the Iraq War. But you also hate taxes and you hate gun control. You are an enigma wrapped in a riddle nestled in a sesame seed bun of mystery. Are you a Republican or are you not a Republican?"

Paul: "You're confused because I'm a constitutionalist, and you haven't met one in a long time. And it's not unusual to put those together if you believe in the rule of law and you believe in the American tradition and believe in limited government and believe in liberty."

I just changed from a indipendent to a repug for the primary so I can vote for Ron Paul.....sure he doesnt have a shot in hell of winning but atleast I'll feel like I voted for someone worth my vote.

He's the only conservative for peace. For that reason, I'm not ready to count him out just yet.

But yeah, last time I voted for him he got about half a percent, and that was against GHW Bush and Dukakis.

I read an article last week which said his campaign contributions have snowballed since NH. (Sorry, no link as I can't remember where I read it! )

Yeah, but what can you buy with snowballs?

Just remember Kerry position early in the Democratic Primary and look how far he went.

Ron Paul - was interviewed on NHPR yesterday morning. There's a couple here, Ed and Elaine Brown, who have been convicted of tax evasion, and they're hunkered down in their bunker, refusing to come out. Ron Paul told the interviewer that Ed Brown was like Ghandi or MLK - Ed Brown who has threatened to kill federal marshalls. Some fucking Ghandi.

His anti-war stance is blinding a lot of people who ought to know better. I will never understand why some on the left are so willing to embrace a phony rightwing maverick, whenever one comes along.

(DISCLAIMER: I also realize that not every Ron Paul fan here is left leaning.)

I wouldn't advocate killing federal marshals, nor can I find a reference to Brown threatening it. But if he does, I sure hope he gets the ones who shot Randy Weaver's family. So far, Brown's resistance is non-violent.

What do you perceive as "phony" about Paul, Maxanne? Can't a conservative be genuinely anti-war?

Ed Brown:
Concord Monitor

New England News

I hope you're in agreement that Ed Brown is no Ghandi, Spud Demon.

Ron Paul tries to present himself as a libertarian - yet he's in NH meeting with Right to Life groups - and he's said that he's against abortion. He's also against marriage equality. Libertarians are supposed to be against that kind of govt. interference.

He's another politician who claims to be in favor of term limits, yet he's served 10 terms.

His stance on immigration is typical right winger.

He's a doctor, but he has no health care plan.

This man is no progressive - to put it mildly.

Why do you like him, Spud Demon?

I don't have any love for libertarians, and I'm sure that colors my perceptions of Ron Paul - but comparing tax evaders to Ghandi and MLK is flat out idiotic, imho.

Those were FBI agents.

I would agree that Ed Brown isn't a copy of Ghandi, isn't struggling for the same thing, and doesn't adhere to the same non-violent beliefs as Ghandi did. But there are similarities. He is ready to become a martyr, and he is working against what he perceives as injustice. That makes him a part of the same broader category as Ghandi and MLK (also many residents of insane asylums and jails). I'm not ready to call him a hero but I don't think painting him as a violent extremist serves any good purpose either. At this point the body count is 0.

In the Colbert interview, Paul said he was a constitutionalist. He didn't use the word libertarian. However, he does still adhere to the core principle advocated by the Libertarian Party back when he led it -- smaller, less powerful government. The philosophy behind this is simple -- there are a lot of things that the government is bad at. From bringing democracy to Iraq to running a healthcare system to imposing the majority's beliefs about the morality of mood-altering chemicals. So don't do it. That's why I like him.

IIRC, he was for gay rights when he was in the LP. He has definitely compromised himself in that area to become a Republican. I can't explain his position on immigration either. On abortion, he's against taxpayer funding of it, which is consistent with his view that the government shouldn't be involved in health care. I'm personally more liberal than that, I think it's especially important to pay for abortions for those who can't afford them. But what Paul brings to the table with his overall philosophy of limited government outweighs it. IMHO of course.

Supporting mandatory limitation of power (such as term limits) and voluntarily giving up that power do not go together. Term limits aren't a big issue to me, but if they were, I'd want him to stay in office and keep voting for them until they passed. And that is what he has been doing.

I know that you know this, Maxanne, but for the benefit of other readers I'll say it explicitly -- Nobody is saying he's a progressive.

Thanks, Jubal.

Does that change put him in the race for Ghandi-hood?

well, he's short old and non-violent, but other than that, i don't see the similarity.

I'm sorry if it seems irrelevant, but the Marshals are about as good a bunch as American cops get. I try to correct it whenever I see them getting lumped in with FBI, DEA, ATF, and all the other three-letter stormtroopers.

So far the Marshals' body count is 0, same as the Browns. And the Weavers, for that matter.

I did not know that. Consider that filed in the memory bank.

Amongst other things, the U.S. Marshals were the ones who escorted the black children into the newly integrated schools in the 50s. They took a lot of crap for that in the communities, and I'm sure many of them were racists who hated desegregation. But overwhelmingly, they did their jobs like pros. The closest approach to Mounties the U.S. has ever had.

At this point, you are correct, the body count is zero. Let us not forget, however, that this man is sitting inside his house, heavily armed - which indicates to me that he's more likely to be a violent extremist than he is to be Mahatma Ghandi. Brown had a blog at one point, and was soliciting things like infrared scopes - which he probably wasn't going to use for playing checkers at night. He's also threatened to shoot cops who enter his property. So - you can spin it any way you like, Spud - but the guy's a nutcase, and he's trying desperately to ensure that there will be a shoot out.

I don't know anything about the man, but I actively approve of sitting inside your house heavily armed. And I think shooting cops who trespass without authority has a salutary effect on the police force and on the concept of liberty.

NB - Why is it always "heavily armed?" It's like "high-powered rifle." The modifier is automatically attached by our well-educated press. Here's the story I'd like to see -

Yesterday, a gang of lightly-armed criminals entered a bank and threatened staff and customers with low-powered rifles.

Classic Journalism there Jubal.
Historically news was in News Papers, and usually there were several papers in every large town.
Even small towns quite often had two.
And since papers made their profit and livelihood by selling these "News" papers, it's always been standard practice to use words and phrases that get the peoples attention, in hopes of buying their paper instead of another.

Expanded commercialism, industrialism and capitalism have taken this proved formula to new extremes. As such, all of these things have had heavy and extensive market research done, redone and refined until these people know more about you than you do, and they don't even have to know your name.

This is the same system, the very same system that was used to hijack the Republican party and then the United States Presidential Administration, and then everything from there on down, including voting practices, lobbying and ethics, as well as the justice department, AND two international wars of conquest!

In Brown's case, he has an arsenal. That makes him "heavily armed" in my vocabulary. He's not just sitting there with a shotgun across his lap.

That is indeed worrisome, particularly if he has extra hands to shoot the additional rifles with.